Search results

Literature reveals ongoing debates around the role of business analysts in agile software development (ASD) teams. This can be attributed, in part, to a knowledge gap concerning how business analysts contribute to overall team capabilities, particularly those which are essential in enabling teams to respond to fast-paced environmental changes. The purpose of this study was to address this gap by investigating how business analysts (BAs) contribute to the dynamic capabilities of ASD teams.

Through a deductive approach, this study adapted and applied a research model based on the team dynamic capabilities (DC) theory to explore the contributions of BAs in agile teams. The study was executed using a qualitative, single case study research strategy directed at an ASD team in the financial services industry. Moreover, data were collected through face-to-face, semi-structured interviews; a focus group; non-participant observation and physical artefacts review. The thematic analysis technique was used to analyse the data.

The study contributes to teams DC theory through four theoretical propositions centred on the role of BAs. The proposition highlights how BAs relationship management, tacit knowledge sharing, task mental models and transactive memory are key contributors of ASD teams' DC. The study also found that BAs contribute to ASD teams' ability to embrace agile principles 2, 4, 6 and 12. This study can inform the design of capacity development programmes for individual team members and BAs and thus help managers curate teams that will best promote DC.

This study can inform the design of capacity development programmes for individual team members and BAs and thus help managers curate teams that will best promote DC.

This study builds on the relatively few studies which focus on DC within software development (SD) teams and ASD project teams. Moreover, the study explores how an individual (i.e. a BA) can contribute to the DC of a team.

This paper describes a quality improvement project to improve oversight of quality at national board level using statistical process control (SPC) methods, complimented by a qualitative experience of patients and frontline staff. It demonstrates the application of the “Picture-Understanding-Action” approach and shares the lessons learnt.

Using co-design and applying the “Picture-Understanding-Action” approach, the project team supported the directors of the Irish health system to identify and test a qualitative and quantitative picture of the quality of care across the health system. A “Quality Profile” consisting of quantitative indicators, analysed using SPC methods was used to provide an overview of the “critical few” indicators across health and social care. Patient and front-line staff experiences added depth and context to the data. These methods were tested and evolved over the course of six meetings, leading to quality of care being prioritised and interrogated at board level.

This project resulted in the integration of quality as a substantive and prioritised agenda item. Using best practice SPC methods with associated training produced better understanding of performance of the system. In addition, bringing patient and staff experiences of quality to the forefront “people-ised” the data.

The application of the “Picture-Understanding-Action” approach facilitated the development of a co-designed quality agenda item. This is a novel process that shifted the focus from “providing” information to co-designing fit-for-purpose information at board level.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the influence of peer mentoring on critical care nursing students’ learning outcomes in critical care units.

A qualitative exploratory research design was used to conduct the study. Ten critical care nursing students were recruited from critical care units in the five private and two public hospitals. Descriptions of their experiences were gained through individual face-to-face interviews.

The study reinforces peer mentoring as a vital strategy in helping the critical care nursing students to attain their learning outcomes. However, peer mentoring was not consistent in all hospitals and there were no structured support systems to ensure that peer mentoring was formalized. Making peer mentoring a vital component in the registered nurses core competencies would enable efficiency and guarantee the viability of peer mentoring.

Mentors for the critical care nursing students were not included in the study.

The study identified a need for incorporating a formalized mentorship programme into the core competencies of all qualified critical care nurses, the unit mentor to familiarise themselves with the prescribed learning objectives of the critical care nursing student and an allocation of supernumerary time for the critical care nursing student and mentors to allow for formal mentoring responsibilities to take place.

The study reinforces peer mentoring as a vital strategy in helping the critical care nursing students to attain their learning outcomes and conscietises registered nurses of their responsibility as mentors.